JUDGMENT : I.A. No. 8441 of 2017 Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that there is delay of 132 days in preferring the appeal and the same may be condoned on the ground as stated in the Interlocutory Application. Having heard, learned counsel for the appellants as well as respondents and after perusing the reasons mentioned in the interlocutory application, delay of 132 days in preferring the appeal is hereby condoned. I.A. No.8441 of 2017 stands disposed of. M.A. No. 207 of 2017 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The claimants are the appellants before this Court and they have preferred this Miscellaneous Appeal for enhancement of the award dated 19.08.2016 passed in Title (M.V.) Suit No. 329 of 2012 by the District Judge-III-cum M.A.C.T., Dhanbad, whereby the claimants/appellants have been awarded compensation to the tune of Rs.4,79,000/- along with simple interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim application i.e. 17.12.2012 till the realization of the amount within a period of 60 days from the date of the order, failing which, penal interest @ 9% per annum shall be calculated after expiry of 60 days. 3. Learned counsel for the appellants has assailed the impugned award for enhancement of the compensation amount on various grounds which are as follows : (i) Income of the deceased (ii) Future Prospect (iii) Amount under the Conventional Head; and (iv) Rate of interest. 4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the deceased (Jamil Akhtar) was coming from his sasural, Kala Daber to his house, Gaydhera on a tempo bearing Registration No.JH-10W-7173, but as soon as, the tempo reached at Karkabad-Fufwadih near bridge on G.T. Road at about 8.45 P.M. on 18.10.2012, turned turtle due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the said Tempo resulting into serious injuries to deceased (Jamil Akhtar) and subsequently he died during treatment at P.M.C.H., Dhanbad. An FIR has been lodged at Govindpur Police Station vide Govindpur P. S. Case No.470 of 2012 dated 19.10.2012 for the offence under Sections 279 & 304(A) of the IPC. The deceased was aged about 27 years and was earning a sum of Rs.8,000/- per month as a Motor Mechanic. The offending tempo was insured before the Respondent No.2-United India Insurance Company Limited vide Policy No.210504/31/12/12/01/00002094 for the period from 25.07.2012 to 24.07.2013. The deceased was aged about 27 years and was earning a sum of Rs.8,000/- per month as a Motor Mechanic. The offending tempo was insured before the Respondent No.2-United India Insurance Company Limited vide Policy No.210504/31/12/12/01/00002094 for the period from 25.07.2012 to 24.07.2013. The accident took place on 18.10.2012 which was within the said coverage. 5. Learned counsel for the appellants has further submitted that respondent No. 2United India Insurance Co. Ltd. has not preferred any appeal nor by the owner of the offending vehicle. The learned Tribunal has awarded less compensation by considering minimum income of the deceased, as such, the same may be enhanced. Learned counsel for the appellants has further submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held in the case of Chameli Devi vs. Jivrail Mian as reported in 2019 (4) TAC 724 SC, that it is very difficult to have documentary evidence of each and every persons. The said case was with regard to the Carpenter whereas the deceased in the present case was Motor Mechanic. 6. Learned counsel for the appellants has assailed the impugned award on the second ground that 40% Future Prospect should be given in view of the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sarla Verma (Smt) & others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & another, reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121 , as the deceased was a self-employed person, aged about 27 years. 7. Learned counsel for the appellants has assailed the impugned award on the third ground that the learned Tribunal has paid less amount i.e. Rs.10,000/-under the conventional head i.e. Rs.5,000/-loss of estate and Rs.5,000/-funeral expenses instead of Rs.70,000/-contrary to the judgment as held by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi and Ors. as reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680 para 59.8, as such, there is every likelihood of enhancement of the award. 8. Learned counsel for the appellants has assailed the impugned award on the fourth ground that interest has been granted @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim application which ought to have been @ 7.5% in view of the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Dharmpal and Sons Vs. UP State Road Transport Corporation, 2008 (4) JCR 79 SC. 9. Learned counsel for the Respondent No.2-United India Insurance Co. UP State Road Transport Corporation, 2008 (4) JCR 79 SC. 9. Learned counsel for the Respondent No.2-United India Insurance Co. Ltd. has submitted that the learned Tribunal has granted just and fair compensation to the claimants, as such, there is no requirement of interference by this Hon'ble Court. 10. Learned counsel for the Respondent No.1/owner of the tempo has submitted that his vehicle was duly insured before the Respondent No.2-United India Insurance Co. Ltd. and there was no violation of any terms and conditions of the policy, as such, the liability has rightly been fastened upon the Insurance Company. 11. Heard, learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials brought on record. It appears that the deceased (Jamil Akhtar) died in a motor vehicle accident at the age of 27 years and his income has been claimed to be Rs.8,000/-which has wrongly been considered by the learned Tribunal as Rs.3,000/-. Following the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Chameli Devi (supra), this Court considered the income of the deceased ought to have been not less than Rs.5,000/-per month, as such, for just and fair compensation, the income of the deceased is considered to be Rs.5,000/-per month along with 40% Future Prospect, in view of judgment of Pranay Sethi (supra). Under the Conventional Head, Rs.70,000/-(Rs.15,000/-as loss of Estate, Rs.15,000/-as Funeral Expenses and Rs.40,000/-as loss of Consortium) is to be given in view of judgment passed by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Pranay Sethi (supra). The awarded amount shall be given with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim application, in view of the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Dharmpal (supra). 12. As per the new calculation chart of compensation should be as follow:- Income Rs.5,000/- P.M Future Prospect 40.00% Income + Future Prospect Rs.7,000/- Annual Income Rs.84,000/- Deduction 1/4th Rs.84,000 – Rs.21,000 = Rs.63,000/- Multiplier 17 Rs.63,000/- x 17= Rs.10,71,000/- Conventional Head Rs.70,000/- Total Compensation amount Rs.11,41,000/- Along with interest @7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim application i.e. 17.12.2012 till its realization. 13. Accordingly, the instant Miscellaneous Appeal stands allowed. 14. Respondent no.2-Insurance Company is directed to satisfy the award deducting the amount paid, if any, within a period of 90 days from today as the occurrence is of the year, 2012.